From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [4.15 stable regression] "Bluetooth: btusb: Fix quirk for Atheros 1525/QCA6174" breaks bluetooth on some devices From: Hans de Goede To: Takashi Iwai Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Marcel Holtmann , "M. Kristall" , linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org References: <6c97cffb-751f-466d-cd7b-42624fdb18c7@redhat.com> <9a752bfc-74bf-25e7-8820-91d1e3163b75@redhat.com> <20180425124757.GA29829@kroah.com> <9b2d31fc-be06-cc05-1ec1-3d0f6f1e21bf@redhat.com> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 11:23:49 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed List-ID: Hi, On 27-04-18 10:57, Hans de Goede wrote: >> -- 8< -- >> From: Takashi Iwai >> Subject: [PATCH] Bluetooth: btusb: Apply QCQ_ROME setup for BTUSB_ATH3012 >>   quirk, too >> >> In commit f44cb4b19ed4 ("Bluetooth: btusb: Fix quirk for Atheros >> 1525/QCA6174") we tried to address the non-working Atheros BT devices >> by changing the quirk from BTUSB_ATH3012 to BTUSB_QCQ_ROME.  This made >> such devices working while it turned out to break other existing chips >> with the very same USB ID. >> >> This is another attempt to tackle the issue.  The essential point to >> use BTUSB_QCA_ROME is to apply the btusb_setup_qca() and do RAM- >> patching.  And the previous attempt failed because btusb_setup_qcq() >> returns -ENODEV if the ROM version doesn't match with the expected >> ones.  For some devices that have already the "correct" ROM versions, >> we may just skip the setup procedure and continue the rest. >> >> So, this patch applies btusb_setup_qca() also in BTUSB_ATH3012 quirk, >> and adds a check of the ROM version in the function to skip the setup >> if the ROM version looks already sane. >> >> Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai >> --- >>   drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c | 5 +++++ >>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c b/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c >> index c8c8b0b8d333..720356320ace 100644 >> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c >> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/btusb.c >> @@ -2673,6 +2673,10 @@ static int btusb_setup_qca(struct hci_dev *hdev) >>           return err; >>       ver_rom = le32_to_cpu(ver.rom_version); >> +    /* Don't care about high ROM versions */ >> +    if (ver_rom & ~0xffffU) >> +        return 0; >> + >>       for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(qca_devices_table); i++) { >>           if (ver_rom == qca_devices_table[i].rom_version) >>               info = &qca_devices_table[i]; >> @@ -3055,6 +3059,7 @@ static int btusb_probe(struct usb_interface *intf, >>       } >>       if (id->driver_info & BTUSB_ATH3012) { >> +        data->setup_on_usb = btusb_setup_qca; >>           hdev->set_bdaddr = btusb_set_bdaddr_ath3012; >>           set_bit(HCI_QUIRK_SIMULTANEOUS_DISCOVERY, &hdev->quirks); >>           set_bit(HCI_QUIRK_STRICT_DUPLICATE_FILTER, &hdev->quirks); >> p.s. This change makes the BTUSB_ATH3012 / BTUSB_QCA_ROME code-paths almost the same, the only difference is the BTUSB_ATH3012 path also setting the HCI_QUIRK_STRICT_DUPLICATE_FILTER flag. Does anyone know if it perhaps would be correct to also set that flag for the QCA_ROME chipset and then unify the 2 code-paths? Regards, Hans